Find a Lawyer

HABIBULLAH BHUTTO versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

5 and 6 cases personal knowledge of the authority of the facts of the case valedictory authority, while using judicial powers in disciplinary matters, could not import their personal knowledge on the facts of the case when the authority had any personal information. Related evidence can be generated. Be presented before the inquiry officer so that they can arrive at a reasonable conclusion rather than making fun of the entire legal process by allowing the inquiry to proceed, and their amending powers based on their personal knowledge regardless of the outcome of the inquiry proceedings. Wait to use. The penal authority will be found to be illegal and prejudiced if he fails to disclose the facts in his personal knowledge to the accused officer in the showcase notice or to mention in his order, but in the confidentiality of his files happens

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2011

• Mst. AZIZ LATIF v. LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2011 SCMR 1494
• MUBARAK ALI v. FIRST PRUDENTIAL MODARABA 2011 SCMR 1496
• Rana MUHAMMAD KHALIL v. REGIONAL AUDIT CHIEF 2011 SCMR 1500
• MUHAMMAD KHALID v. State 2011 SCMR 1501
• MUHAMMAD MUDDASAR v. State 2011 SCMR 1513
• AKHTAR ZAMAN KHAN v. State 2011 SCMR 1514
• PROVINCE OF PUNJAB v. AKHTAR AND CO. 2011 SCMR 1516
• MUHAMMAD NADEEM alias BANKA v. State 2011 SCMR 1517

All Supreme Court judgments of 2011 →

patent advocate from Rawalpindi lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes